CORAM
WALTER SAMUEL NKANU ONNOGHEN JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
RUFUS ISAAC APPELLANTS
JOHN ODIGIE IMASUEN RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The Plaintiff/Respondent claimed against the Defendant/Appellant declaration of title to the right of occupancy to the land in dispute, damages for trespass to same land and restraining injunction. The Plaintiff/Respondent’s case was that upon been challenged on the land by the Defendant/Appellant, he informed them that he acquired the land six years ago. The Plaintiff/Respondent went further to report to the Oba of Benin who set up a committee to investigate the matter. The Plaintiff/Respondent instituted the action when he realized that Oba was unable to settle the matter. The trial Court after hearing arguments from both parties held in favour of the of Plaintiff/Respondent . Dissatisfied with the decision of the trial court, the Defendant/Appellant appealed to the court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal and affirmed the decision of the Court of Appeal. Still dissatisfied, the Defendant/Appellant appealed to the Supreme Court.
HELD
Appeal Dismissed
ISSUES
1. Whether the respondent who, having pleaded and established by credible evidence facts on which his claim predicates be lawfully refused the reliefs he seeks against the appellant who neither pleaded nor established his entitlement to the equitable defence of laches, acquiescence and standing by? I think not.
RATIONES DECIDENDI
ISSUE FOR DETERMINATION- ISSUE FOR DETERMINATION MUST BE DISTILLED FROM GROUND OF APPEAL
“The law is that an issue for determination must be distilled from the grounds of appeal, which must in turn be predicated upon the ratio decidendi of the judgment or ruling appealed against. See: DALEK NIG, LTD VS. OMPADEC (2007) ALL FWLR (364) 204 @ 226 F – H; Adelekan Vs ECU-LINE NV (2006) 12 NWLR (Pt. 993) 33; Yadis Nig. Ltd. Vs Great Nigeria Insurance Co. Ltd. (2007) 14 NWLR (Pt. 1055) 584.” PER KUDIRAT. M. O KEKERE-EKUN, J.S.C
FACTS NOT PLEADED-DEFENDANT ARE NOT ENTITLED TO RELY UPON A DEFENCE WHICH IS BASED UPON FACTS NOT STATED IN HIS STATEMENT OF DEFENCE. “A defendant such as the appellant is not entitled to rely upon a defence which is based upon facts not stated in his s
“A defendant such as the appellant is not entitled to rely upon a defence which is based upon facts not stated in his statement of defence. The facts a defendant alleges and relies upon must be stated specifically in his pleadings by way of a special defence”PER MUSA DATTIJO MUHAMMAD, JSC.
RULES OF PLEADINGS- BENEFIT OF RULES OF PLEADING
“This Court has, in very many cases, emphasized that parties only safeguard their interest if they strictly adhere to the rules of pleading in the conduct of their cases. Because their main function is to ascertain the various matters in dispute among the parties and those on which some agreement have been attained with such degree of certainly that is humanly possible, pleadings must be sufficient, comprehensive, and accurate. Every pleading, particularly those which raise special defences, must contain statement of all the material facts on which a defendant bases his defence to avoid surprise to the plaintiff.” PER MUSA DATTIJO MUHAMMAD, JSC.
EQUITABLE DEFENCE OF LACHES AND ACQUIESCENCE- EQUITABLE DEFENCE OF LACHES AND ACQUIESCENCE MUST BE SPECIFICALLY PLEADED AND PROVED
“The law is that a defence of laches and acquiescence must be specifically pleaded and proved. Full facts and particulars must be pleaded, See: Adeniran Vs Alao (20Q1) 12 SCN3 337. The person relying on the defence must plead that the respondent fraudulently, knowingly and deliberately stood by while he changed his position. See: Ezekwesili Vs Agbapuonwu (2003) 9 NWLR(PT. 825)337@381, PER KUDIRAT. M. O KEKERE-EKUN, J.S.C
PLEADED FACTS – LAW COURT PROCEED NOT ONLY ON THE BASIS OF PLEADED FACTS BUT ALSO ON THE BASIS OF THE FACTS AS ESTABLISHED BY EVIDENCE.
“It is an elementary principle that decisions of a law court proceed not only on the basis of pleaded facts but also on the basis of the facts as established by evidence in that behalf. Thus any decision of a court which proceeds in the absence of the party’s pleadings and/or evidence in proof of the pleadings, being perverse, would not endure on appeal. See Okonkwo V. C.C.B. (Nig) Pic (2003) 8 NWLR (Pt 822) 347, Thompson V. Arowolo (2003) 7 NWLR (Pt 818) 163 and Adake V. Akun (2003) 14 NWLR (Pt 840) 418.”PER MUSA DATTIJO MUHAMMAD, JSC.
FACTS NOT PLEADED-DEFENDANT ARE NOT ENTITLED TO RELY UPON A DEFENCE WHICH IS BASED UPON FACTS NOT STATED IN HIS STATEMENT OF DEFENCE. “A defendant such as the appellant is not entitled to rely upon a defence which is based upon facts not stated in his s
“A defendant such as the appellant is not entitled to rely upon a defence which is based upon facts not stated in his statement of defence. The facts a defendant alleges and relies upon must be stated specifically in his pleadings by way of a special defence”
RULES OF PLEADINGS- BENEFIT OF RULES OF PLEADING
“This Court has, in very many cases, emphasized that parties only safeguard their interest if they strictly adhere to the rules of pleading in the conduct of their cases. Because their main function is to ascertain the various matters in dispute among the parties and those on which some agreement have been attained with such degree of certainly that is humanly possible, pleadings must be sufficient, comprehensive, and accurate. Every pleading, particularly those which raise special defences, must contain statement of all the material facts on which a defendant bases his defence to avoid surprise to the plaintiff.”
EQUITABLE DEFENCE OF LACHES AND ACQUIESCENCE- EQUITY CANNOT ALLOW A LAND OWNER WHO STOOD BY WHILE A STRANGER DEVELOPED HIS LAND IN GOOD FAITH TO REAP THE BENEFIT OF SUCH DEVELOPMENT.
“Laches and acquiescence, being equitable defences in essence, they merely state if a land owner stood by while a stranger developed his land in good faith such owner would be estopped from reaping the benefit of such development and a court of equity would not assist him in enforcing his right. See Afolabi Coker V. Moriamo Qg Unto La And Ors. (19841 2 NSCL 869. Godwin Nsiege And Anor V. Obinna Magbemena And Anor. (2007) 4 SCNJ 359. This equitable defence when raised must be specifically pleaded in the defendant’s statement of defence. It must contain statement of all material facts in which a defendant has based such defence. This is to avoid springing a surprise on the plaintiff.”
ISSUE FOR DETERMINATION- ISSUE FOR DETERMINATION MUST BE DISTILLED FROM GROUND OF APPEAL
“The law is that an issue for determination must be distilled from the grounds of appeal, which must in turn be predicated upon the ratio decidendi of the judgment or ruling appealed against. See: DALEK NIG, LTD VS. OMPADEC (2007) ALL FWLR (364) 204 @ 226 F – H; Adelekan Vs ECU-LINE NV (2006) 12 NWLR (Pt. 993) 33; Yadis Nig. Ltd. Vs Great Nigeria Insurance Co. Ltd. (2007) 14 NWLR (Pt. 1055) 584.”
EQUITABLE DEFENCE OF LACHES AND ACQUIESCENCE- EQUITABLE DEFENCE OF LACHES AND ACQUIESCENCE MUST BE SPECIFICALLY PLEADED AND PROVED
“The law is that a defence of laches and acquiescence must be specifically pleaded and proved. Full facts and particulars must be pleaded, See: Adeniran Vs Alao (20Q1) 12 SCN3 337. The person relying on the defence must plead that the respondent fraudulently, knowingly and deliberately stood by while he changed his position. See: Ezekwesili Vs Agbapuonwu (2003) 9 NWLR (PT. 825)337@381,
CASES CITED